- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Despite the Bravodo, the RIsk isn't Worth It
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:37 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:37 am
This guy makes a good point about the layered approach, especially if the CFP adds a ban. I can't see any school, even LSU, taking the risk of playing these guys.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:39 am to rds dc
They will absolutely play them if the courts say that we can. As long as we are following the law, what can anyone do?
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:41 am to pgaddxn
Nothing is stopping the CFP Committee from underseeding us or leaving us out of the playoff if we're a bubble team.
Unfortunate, but true since it's mostly "subjective" despite there being written criteria for the teams selected.
Unfortunate, but true since it's mostly "subjective" despite there being written criteria for the teams selected.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:45 am to GeauxPanthers2
quote:
Nothing is stopping the CFP Committee from underseeding us or leaving us out of the playoff
Bubble team or not, they can do this.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:47 am to pgaddxn
quote:
They will absolutely play them if the courts say that we can. As long as we are following the law, what can anyone do?
The conferences have the power here. STFU about thinking these guys are going pro and then coming back to college.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:48 am to rds dc
They're setting up for a court battle. I don't think these guys play this season ...or notist of it. But I do think these players eventually win, and likely sue the NCAA, SEC, and other parties and walk away with significant $$.
I also think this ends with a strong rul that establishes the 5-for-5 permanently, giving both sides a technical win.
I also think this ends with a strong rul that establishes the 5-for-5 permanently, giving both sides a technical win.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:48 am to GeauxPanthers2
Fair
But if we are undefeated or 11-1 and this happens. I have a strong feeling things would go nuclear at that point.
But if we are undefeated or 11-1 and this happens. I have a strong feeling things would go nuclear at that point.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:52 am to rds dc
Isn't that the Ole Miss lawyer for Trinidad?
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:55 am to rds dc
I would say the cfp committee is associated with the NCAA, so it's not that simple. they could be in contempt also.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 10:55 am to pgaddxn
This rule issued days after the court ruling is obviously in contempt of the court ruling. It basically says don’t tell the SEC what to do judge.
It us really worth it for basketball for an all American player who averaged 18 points per game.
It us really worth it for basketball for an all American player who averaged 18 points per game.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:00 am to pgaddxn
There’s something we’re missing here. Why would Sankey and comp assure Kiffin and the other coaches that the Protect College Sports Act amendment said that no retroactive rules would be issued to conflict with court rulings just to immediately do exactly that? There was an obvious loophole that wasn’t addressed, almost as if it was bait. Something else is going on here.
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 11:01 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:04 am to beauchristopher
quote:
Isn't that the Ole Miss lawyer for Trinidad?
Yes, he has sued the NCAA in several cases. So, the guy knows a bit about how these cases work.
In the Chambliss case, the NCAA fought it all the way to the Mississippi Supreme Court, where the court denied the NCAA's appeal to block the lower court's decision.
In the current 5-for-5 cases, the NCAA is 3-0 when seeking appeals to block injunctions.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:06 am to rds dc
None of these guys are NFL caliber players. None are practicing with us today. None would add meaningful playing time soon. Not sure why we would even care.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:07 am to nola tiger lsu
quote:
The conferences have the power here. STFU about thinking these guys are going pro and then coming back to college.
Log off if you don’t want to see people discussing this.
Bitch arse
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:11 am to rds dc
quote:
current 5-for-5 cases, the NCAA is 3-0 when seeking appeals to block injunctions
Yep, unfortunately this is likely what's gonna happen in our situation as well, as soon as it gets to the appeal from NCAA
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:11 am to Clark W Griswold
quote:
None of these guys are NFL caliber players. None are practicing with us today. None would add meaningful playing time soon. Not sure why we would even care.
What we have done is guarantee that they aren't playing anywhere else that they could make a difference.
Whether that was intentional or not, it's a decently positive outcome for us. We leveraged the general negativity towards us and the absurdity of the situation to make sure none of our opponents could benefit from this.
No one gives two shits about the other football programs that were doing more or less the same thing, but they got all up in arms when we did it.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:14 am to DeathValley85
He is that.
I dont think they play either. Would live to have them for depth.
How do you start school in the third or 4th week anyway.
I dont think they play either. Would live to have them for depth.
How do you start school in the third or 4th week anyway.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 11:16 am to nola tiger lsu
quote:
STFU about thinking these guys are going pro and then coming back to college.
Little boy go sit down and suck on ya mommas titty a little more with that foul mouth.
Popular
Back to top

7









